About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
enforcement. we know that doesn't quite work for several reasons. one, there is an exception in the miranda rights. when a suspect is read their rights by the police, we're talking about a miranda warning. there is a provision that allows in case law that allows for law enforcement to wait if they think there is a national security threat or a danger to the public until they've talked to the person and established there isn't a danger to the public or gotten the information they need. then they can read the miranda rights. that's what the fbi has done in this case. that's what they did in the new york time square bomber. that worked quite well. they talk to him for a while before they read him his rights. then they read him his rights. he kept and he provided very valuable information. we know that the traditional civilian court system founded by the founding fathers can work in this situation. >> let me ask you a couple questions. if the russian government was so concerned about tamerlan as to alert our fbi and our government, and warrant an investigation of him, why are we so sure that dz
not get his miranda rights. >> among of group of republicans calling for the boston bombing suspect to be considered an enemy combatant. that means he would not have the same constitutional protection as a regular citizen, with regard to what he says as the investigation moves forward. will this happen? california congressman, a senior member of the intelligence committee. congressman, always good to see you. i know that you disagree with the congressman and think that the suspect is in custody. is entitled to his miranda rights. why? >> well, i think the administration is handling it exactly correct. there is a public safety exception under the miranda allowing law enforcement to interview him, making sure there are no other bombs, threats, perpetrators still out there giving the law enforcement flexibility to do the that prior to miranda and i think the court will interpret it broadly and give them the time they need to make sure that the public is safe. after that, he will have to be mirandized, doesn't mean the end of cooperation, but no basis yet to conclude they should be trea
's before he gets the miranda rights. the fact that he can't speak right now, does that push back that window of time because they're not getting anything from him? >> that's a good question that i won't speculate on without a legal background. i'll leave that one up to the master pete williams. but i can imagine there's got to be some sort of gray area there that some lawyer could look at. on that point, though, i think it's interesting, where we've gone now from, alex, is we've gone from this, all right, what exactly happened, to these real sort of questions surrounding the national security of this country, and how exactly these two individuals were able to go forward with what they ultimately accomplished. so this morning, sort of around that point, talking to folks related to the house homeland security committee, they say they really want to sort of get this investigation rolling on why these two individuals seem to have slipped through the u.s. intelligence community, especially after that information reported yesterday that the russians were concerned about the older broth
yesterday applauding the suspension of miranda rights for the teenage suspect. he even suggested we haven't gone far enough. and advocated for labeling the suspect an enemy combatant. by defining this week's events as terrorism, we endow the violence with political meaning. when we call their homemade bombs but not adam lanza's bush master xm 15 rifle weapons of mass destruction, we sent out a trajectory for the prosecution when we focus on months that one suspect spent overseas rather than the years that both spent in the u.s. we assume a limited geography for the incubation of evil. so here we go. the crisis is over and the politics begin. folks, this is actually the most dangerous part. with me at the table today is msnbc contributor and georgetown university professor, michael eric dyson. valerie core, a writer and fi filmmak filmmaker. co-host of the cycle and robert pape, director of the project security and -- >> bb, let me start with you. what do you think happened this week? >> what i think happened is we had homegrown terrorism come to the united states. since 9/11, this is the
. just to confirm, this -- dzhokhar tsarnaev has not yet been read his miranda rights, correct? >> i have to say i don't know. because there was an initial appearance today, that's why this complaint is out. the circuit executive, the administrator of this area, has put out a statement saying there was an initial appearance before a magistrate judge. that is as far as i understand it an arraignment. i have never heard of an arraignment without an attorney present. they didn't mention an attorney present. if an attorney is present, the attorney will simply say to the client, you -- don't answer questions. at that point, the attorney is the person the prosecutor is supposed to deal with. i have to say, there is information out there that we don't have. whether an attorney was present, whether this was an actual arraignment, i think we just need to hold off on that until we get more information. >> we're holding off. still so early this all happened. >> before we let deb feyerick go and chase down that lead she was referring to, deb, i was wondering, is there anything else that stands out in
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5